| Feb-21-05 | | chess man: I like that note <!> by Capablanca. |
 |
| Jul-05-05 | | THE pawn: Are you sure it's not Nimzowitsch who did the exclamation mark? |
 |
| Sep-29-06 | | Sleeping kitten: "What remains needs few remarks." Then why does Capablanca, at the 23rd move, exchange an enormous knight against a microscopic bishop without future ? Shereshevsky says the white bad bishop, in fact, supports White's kingside pawns. After the exchange, the black bishop will be stronger than the white knight. With this and the control of the open file, White's position collapses. In fact, this game anticipates 22 Nxd7+! in Fischer vs Petrosian, 1971 ! At the 29th move, Nimzowitsch asks "Why not Bxg4 ?" and Chernev answers (in Capablanca's Best Chess Endings) 29...Bxg4 30 Nxh4 gxh4 31 Rg2. |
 |
Sep-29-06
 | | technical draw: I am N Klined to believe white played poorly. |
 |
Dec-02-06
 | | Calli: Yeah, except I'm n-klined to think this is Dr Harry Kline, a good local NY player for several decades. He finished 10th out of 14 at this tourney (NY Masters 1913). |
 |
| Sep-09-09 | | roastedrook: great annotation by Nimzo, he makes feel as If I was there on the board, analyzing positions and predicting moves ahead .. gg Capa |
 |
Sep-25-10
 | | Fusilli: In these annotations, Nimzowitsch gives the line 22.Nf5 hxg3 23.hxg3 Bxf5 24.exf5 Ne7 25.Kg2: click for larger viewAnd here he gives 25...Kg7 for Black, who loses a piece and ends up lost, and asks: is the pawn sacrifice 25...g4 26.fxg4 Ng5 any better? Well, I'd say "of course it is!" Maybe I am missing something, but I prefer to lose a pawn to losing the piece. |
 |
Apr-21-12
 | | bystander: 10. 0-0. What about waiting with castling and see how black wants to develop? E.g. 10.h3 h5 11. h2 f4 12. f4x ef4x 13.0-0-0 f8. |
 |
Apr-21-12
 | | bystander: 13. de5x. Is white really forced to this exchange? Can't white postpone this move, for example. 13. h4 g6 14. f6x f6x 15. fe1 d7 16. ad1 ad8 17.a4. |
 |
Apr-21-12
 | | bystander: 16.Ne1. I assume the intention of this move is to give g2 some extra protection. Maybe this can also be achieved with the bishop. For example. 16. fd1 f4 17. f1 e6 18. d2 ad8 19. dc4. |
 |
Apr-21-12
 | | bystander: 19.N3g2. 19. e2 looks better to me. 19. e2 h4 20. 1g2 g6 21. f5. |
 |
Apr-22-12
 | | bystander: <Sep-25-10. Fusilli: In these annotations, Nimzowitsch gives the line 22.Nf5 hxg3 23.hxg3 Bxf5 24.exf5 Ne7 25.Kg2:And here he gives 25...Kg7 for Black, who loses a piece and ends up lost> I was not so impressed bij 25...Kg7 either. 25...Nd5 (pressure on e3 and f4) looks better for black. Maybe black has to sacrifice a pawn, but is does not look to bad. 25... d5 25. d3 g4 26.fg4x e4 27. c4 e3 28. e2 e2. But is 22. f5 really the best line for white? I have been looking to lines which start with 25.Kg2. I think that black keeps a small advantage. For example: 25. g2 hg3x 26.hg3x g7 27. h1 h8 28. d1 g4. |
 |
Apr-22-12
 | | bystander: 34) Nc2. Better looks 34. f5 d7 35. g1 (to attack h3 and the black king). My computer prefers 33)... f4 or e7 for black, but I do not understand why. |
 |
Apr-23-12
 | | Fusilli: <bystander: ... Maybe black has to sacrifice a pawn, but is does not look to bad. 25...Nd5 25.Qd3> 25.Qd3 is not possible. There is a white bishop on d3, right? (I believe that is the position from my earlier diagram.) |
 |
Apr-24-12
 | | bystander: <Apr-23-12 Fusilli: <bystander: ... Maybe black has to sacrifice a pawn, but is does not look too bad. 25...Nd5 25.Qd3> Sorry fot that. The line how it supposed to be is {25...Nd5 26. Qd2 g4 27. fg4x e4 28. Lc4 e3 29. Qe2 Ne2). A little bit to much of typos. |
 |
May-07-12
 | | Fusilli: <bystander> Yes, that looks totally playable for Black. (I am sure you meant 29...Nf2, not Ne2, as the last move in your line). Also interesting, in this position, which results from your analysis after 22.Nf5 hxg3 23.hxg3 Bxf5 24.exf5 Ne7 25.Kg2 Nd5 26.Qd2:  click for larger viewThe Tal-like sac 26...Nhf4+ is pretty interesting. It leads to a sharp game of incalculable outcome (that's why I say "Tal-like"). |
 |